Although the inclusion of affirmation language in the jury instruction was not fundamental error, the best practice is for trial courts to redact such language from the pattern jury instructions.
Appeals
Pinner v. State, No. 49A02-1511-CR-2036, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2016).
Mere possession of a firearm, which is legal, cannot produce reasonable suspicion to justify a Terry stop.
Compton v. State, No. 82A01-1511-CR-1997, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2016).
Defendant was not deprived due process when the media was allowed to tweet live updates of his criminal trial from the courtroom.
Lacy v. State, No. 18A04-1510-CR-1757, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., August 16, 2016).
The “lawful purpose” exception in the identity deception statute at Ind. Code § 35-43-5-3.5 is an affirmative defense and not a material element of the crime.
State v. Morgan, No. 89A04-1603-CR-622, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 16, 2016).
The Indiana Legend Drug Act, Ind. Code § 16-42-19-20, is not unconstitutionally vague and it was possible for defendant nurse, as a non-physician, to know whether her actions were outside the usual course of professional medical practice.